1. OCAU Merchandise now available! Check out our 20th Anniversary Mugs, Classic Logo Shirts and much more! Discussion here.
    Dismiss Notice

Insurance and Australian Compliance for chargers

Discussion in 'Electronics & Electrics' started by shiny1, Oct 22, 2019.

  1. Sunder

    Sunder Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    3,766
    Damn, insurance companies are scum and try to find any excuse to avoid paying, but I'd like to see that one get through a court case. Imagine telling a judge that you're not paying out hundreds of thousands, because a person bought a charger from anything less than a reputable source.
     
  2. broccoli

    broccoli Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2010
    Messages:
    21,513
    Location:
    Perth
    It might not, it might never be raised in the first place, this is speculation. The bottom line is that people should avoid giving any "ammo" for refusals of claims. Who has the sort of money needed to take on an insurer? Just buy certified stuff from a proper shop. Saving $10 (or whatever) isn't worth the risk of using some dodgy fake from god knows where.
     
  3. miicah

    miicah Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2010
    Messages:
    6,989
    Location:
    Mount Cotton, QLD
    Surely the targus 5-in-1 chargers from umart are certified? They even are rated to do 5 iPad pros at once
     
  4. Sunder

    Sunder Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    3,766
    Absolutely. That's why I took it so far with the fake Samsung charger, rather than just accept a refund. But we have people here ranging from "Even if it's fake, you're safe", to "They'll be able to magically tell after all the evidence is destroyed that you bought something non-compliant".

    The situation is ridiculous.
     
  5. broccoli

    broccoli Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2010
    Messages:
    21,513
    Location:
    Perth
    Having an insurer refuse a claim would be the least of your worries, burning your house down wouldn't be fun, and it might not be just your house. It could zap you or your kid. Electricity is something I never mess with. Just pay for something you should be able to rely on. Never cheap out.
     
  6. mtma

    mtma Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    Messages:
    5,436
    and investigations.

    If the insurance company reasonably believes that there has been a degree of malpractice or intent by the covered that suggests they should deny the claim, there are investigation based methods to draw out the covered. They don't necessarily need to use the policy clauses applied directly to the event to find some way of denying your claim.

    But this does require a lot of resources, so reserved for those that have been building a suspicious chain of claims, claims that are of enormous value or which involve major injury or loss of life.
     
  7. the3coopers

    the3coopers Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2012
    Messages:
    1,685
    Location:
    Sydney 2151
    Be assured that they are very experienced with forensic investigations, so they can work it out. There is probably more risk of electrocution than fire anyway, and the regulators can determine the supply chain even if the person who made the purchase is unable to confirm anything (due to being dead). Example: https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw...om-apparent-electrocution-20140626-zsngd.html

    I've been involved in defending our company during a number of safety-related investigations by the electrical safety regulators. In almost all cases where there has been reports of "fires", the device had failed (usually the MOV surge suppressor) with some smoke, rather than actually catching fire. The smoke caused smoke alarms to trigger in a commercial premises, bringing the fire department and thereafter an investigation by the electrical regulator.

    Our items were 100% compliant so the casing materials used were self-extinguishing, however in some cases an internal component failure caused a lot of heat and in one case (ironically a school) the molten (and smouldering) plastic housing material had dripped onto another room surface that was not fire-retardant. It was that other item that continued to burn, not our product which remained largely intact.

    Considering the small difference between the cost of legal and compliant products, it always baffles me why people "cheap out" on stuff like phone chargers. These are a device used at least once per day, so there is far more incentive to buy something decent.
     
  8. Sunder

    Sunder Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    3,766
    That's fair enough... But I recall back in 2013-2014, when we had those spates of fires and electrocutions caused by cheap chinese phone chargers, I vaguely recall an article saying there were categories of devices which must have certification which ranged from low risk like kettles, to high risk, like LED drivers, and that the average home had 30 something devices which were not compliant.

    I'm guessing that would mean in the average house, half to 1/3rd of devices are non-compliant. I'm guessing this means electrical fires would almost never be paid out by insurance companies. :(
     
  9. the3coopers

    the3coopers Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2012
    Messages:
    1,685
    Location:
    Sydney 2151
    The full list is here: https://www.eess.gov.au/wp-content/...quipment-definitions-and-risk-levels-v2.0.pdf

    A kettle is "High Risk", as it falls under "Liquid heating appliance". Both level 3 and Level 2 categories must be registered under the scheme. Level 3 (High Risk) items must also have a valid Safety Certificate.

    It's unlikely that the percentage of non-compliance was that high, and I'd say that the insurance companies would be more lenient with domestic premises. However, in the case of a school there are additional "duty of care" responsibilities, and that probably eliminates the ability to plead ignorance to safety regulations.

    In any case, the far more common risk would be a student getting a "zap" or "tingle" from a non-compliant charger. The kids don't need to get killed to create a huge big incident (just a report back to a parent might be enough to create a fuss), and the person responsible for purchasing would be the "lamb to the slaughter" if shit went down. Therefore, the OP should document all recommendations and make sure that they are covered in the event that price pressures force an inferior solution to be adopted.
     
  10. FOTW

    FOTW Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2002
    Messages:
    1,077
    Location:
    Kilcock, Ireland
    There are multi charging docks/station available especially tailored to schools some even let you lock the ipads away while they are charging. They cost quite a bit, most likely as expensive or even more so then getting a individual charger for each device, however they would be certified and have their own insurance in case one of their devices fails and causes any damage. Also as you mentioned you wont tie up as many power sockets and less inventory to keep track off.
     
  11. GrandmasBoi

    GrandmasBoi Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2019
    Messages:
    285
    Using non genuine Apple chargers/lightning cables will eventually fry the u2/tristar chips on any Apple devices resulting in no charge/fake charge or accessorie not found message because apple design it not to have current protection when using non genuine so you will need some micro soldering bga skills to fix that up
     
  12. FOTW

    FOTW Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2002
    Messages:
    1,077
    Location:
    Kilcock, Ireland
    I think the protection is built into the charging cable or an MFi certified cable not the charger itself. There could also be a chip in the charger as well I'm not 100% certain however i do know using a non MFi certified cable can cause the U2 Tristar chip to fail even when using a genuine charger.

    https://discdepotstandrews.co.uk/apple-tristaru2-repair-how-cheap-lightning-cables-cause-damage/

    https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/...ing-cables-kill-iphones-cheap-iphone-chargers
     
  13. WilliamG

    WilliamG Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2019
    Messages:
    1
    About using a charger that has fraudulent Australian approval marks. ( but is not actually approved for use in Australia )

    Most likely insurance company policy would "have an out."
    Why not actually ask your insurance company about this , and where it is covered in the policy wording?

    On the link below , I found useful detailed info about checking Australian compliance.
    https://www.sa.gov.au/topics/energy...y-and-gas-safely/buying-electrical-appliances

    I thought asking the seller for the compliance certificate before buying was a good idea.
    In any case you need to check on the Online compliance database. Doing this check will locate fraudulently marked devices.
     

Share This Page

Advertisement: